BaL 26.05.12/25.02.23 - Messiaen: Turangalila Symphony

[Bryn]

There is however a difference between not being heard too clearly and not being heard at all except when the strings have their (unmarked) pauses. But I can see I'm in a minority with this thought. I shall await a recording of the piece which does something more like what the composer wrote, as opposed to what others think he meant.

Fair enough. So just how clearly should three triangles marked as ppp sound against strings opening at pp then lifting to f during the very first bar of that movement while the tringles remain ppp?

[Joseph K]

Is this thread about Turangalila Symphonie or Eclairs sur l'Au-dela?

[Bryn]

Is this thread about Turangalila Symphonie or Eclairs sur l'Au-dela?

Yes. The immediate question relates to both works, regarding the timbral influence on the strings of the Ondes Martenod in Turangalîla-symphonie and the three triangles in the final movement of Éclairs sur l'Au-Delà...

[jayne lee wilson]

Here's the thing though: if you need sophisticated high quality equipment to hear something that a composer wrote into a score (I was listening on headphones connected directly to the audio output of a laptop), either the conductor or the recording engineer or both is not really doing their job properly.

Milldy abashed at this comment.... what about the equipment used in the recording process, as often delineated in the booklet credits? That is usually of such high quality, surely?

Doesn't "sophisticated high quality equipment", potentially at the very least, get you closer to what was heard in studio or (e.g in the case of the Polish/Wit example) the concert hall? As you know I use monitoring equipment used in studios round the world in my own system, ATC amps/Harbeth Speakers etc....for those very qualities of analytical clarity.

[jayne lee wilson]

I don't think the triangles in the final movement were intended to be heard too clearly as other than a subtle colouring of the texture, much as he would often use the Ondes Martenot which were specifically excluded in the commission.

.

Yes, exactly as per the Yvonne Loriod quote I gave, and as I heard on several recordings (including Wit) and so described in my posts #170 and #173.....

[jayne lee wilson]

Your thought seems to me very reasonable. I'm not sure we should have to rely on our subconscious imagining of what might (or might not) be going on in our inner ears, to hear what the composer very clearly indicates in his score.

Please reread my posts #170 and #173, where I made it very clear that this is not just "subconscious imagining", but clearly yet subtly audible, just as Loriod describes in her own very comprehensive notes to the Polish NRO/Wit album, on the recordings I have gone to some trouble, repeatedly to describe here.
So far, only Richard and I have even offered our own actual listening experiences to these recordings. More would be better than further abstracted comment. I can give more timed references, but I hope they won't be needed....(screen-sickness/dizziness is a problem for me now, I can only visit briefly and write quickly before a break...but any of my listening observations are always carefully checked.)

*****

Sorry to those who feel I've led us off the Turangalîla track, but the close structural, thematic and emotional links between these two works (not enough has been said about this in various reviews or commentaries) make it impossible to discuss Turanga with some reference to Éclairs, especially given our usually broader take on a given BaL subject, rather than confine the discussion to recommendations of the R3 choice.

(I may come back later on the highly variable role played by the Ondes in various Turangalîla recordings, which is indeed crucial to the musical and emotional effect and affect).

[RichardB]

Fair enough. So just how clearly should three triangles marked as ppp sound against strings opening at pp then lifting to f during the very first bar of that movement while the tringles remain ppp?

Firstly, the strings don't stay at "f" as you will presumably have seen. Secondly, musical dynamics aren't an exact science of course. While very few composers use more than 8 different dynamic levels in their scores, they know that in reality there's much more nuance than this and it depends on which instrument is playing and in which register and what the musical context is (relative to phenomena like acoustic masking). Thirdly, much depends on whether the music is being heard live or on a recording. In a live situation the triangles could be very quiet indeed, but because you can see them, and because you experience a relatively wide (or deep, to be more precise) spatial separation between strings and percussion when you and they are in the same space, the situation is different. Last year I was involved in editing and mixing audio for a video production, and there was one moment I thought was going to be a problem because one particular percussion hit didn't really make itself felt; the videographer told me not to worry, when you see it you'll hear it differently, and she was right. When you can't see the performers or directly experience the space they're in, and you're in a different space anyway which probably isn't a studio control room, it's up to the recording engineer to compensate for that lack, and not just for hifi gearheads but for people who might be listening in somewhat less than optimal conditions.

[jayne lee wilson]

Firstly, the strings don't stay at "f" as you will presumably have seen. Secondly, musical dynamics aren't an exact science of course. While very few composers use more than 8 different dynamic levels in their scores, they know that in reality there's much more nuance than this and it depends on which instrument is playing and in which register and what the musical context is (relative to phenomena like acoustic masking). Thirdly, much depends on whether the music is being heard live or on a recording. In a live situation the triangles could be very quiet indeed, but because you can see them, and because you experience a relatively wide (or deep, to be more precise) spatial separation between strings and percussion when you and they are in the same space, the situation is different. Last year I was involved in editing and mixing audio for a video production, and there was one moment I thought was going to be a problem because one particular percussion hit didn't really make itself felt; the videographer told me not to worry, when you see it you'll hear it differently, and she was right. When you can't see the performers or directly experience the space they're in, and you're in a different space anyway which probably isn't a studio control room, it's up to the recording engineer to compensate for that lack, and not just for hifi gearheads but for people who might be listening in somewhat less than optimal conditions.

See my #184 to #186, but aren't domestic etc. playback conditions too variable to compensate for, especially in classical recordings where dynamic and other naturalness is a prime aim?
I've sometimes seen complaints to hifi magazines about the wide dynamic range in e.g. BIS recordings (or earlier about that of CD itself, especially with modestly-rated amps/high input sensitivity), but isn't it better that they should make the best recordings they can, leaving the home listener to control their own immediate playback environment (which may change across time)?

[Master Jacques]

When you can't see the performers or directly experience the space they're in, and you're in a different space anyway which probably isn't a studio control room, it's up to the recording engineer to compensate for that lack, and not just for hifi gearheads but for people who might be listening in somewhat less than optimal conditions.

Nail and head! The art of the recording engineer must allow for a broad range of listening conditions, not just the select few for whom what they're listening on can seem more crucial than what they're listening to. If we're not careful, that can produce the most useless kind of sterile one-upmanship in place of debate.

These two gargantuan Messiaen scores certainly present very different challenges in the hall and on disc, where the visual and spacial elements cannot be part of the equation. It's certainly easier to appreciate them in the hall. At home (when we're not on the road!) most of us have to experience these recordings in smallish rooms, using standard hi-fi equipment and possibly headphones. So before we start indulging in delicious hieratics, we have to be able to hear - as near as possible - what Messiaen wrote. That's the bottom line.

Edit: it's perhaps a pity that Turangalila doesn't seem to be available to watch on DVD, which could well enhance the work for many people. As someone for whom, unfortunately, the work has "gone cold", part of my problem has been never being able to recapture my first experience of it, which was live at the Free Trade Hall, Hallé, Skrowaczewski, rather a long time ago!

[RichardB]

Moving right on... to the question of the ondes musicales in Turangalîla, it's a somewhat different question from the matter of the triangles, because some recordings have it too quiet, to my taste (Ozawa for example - I didn't think so back in the day but I had nothing to compare it with!) while some have it too loud (Lintu, to cite a recording I've heard in the last few days), and it's quite a different matter from balancing acoustic instruments against one another because the Ondes, being an electronic instrument, can be turned down to silence or up to ear-splitting volume, without the sound quality changing more than a very little, as opposed to acoustic instruments whose timbre can be quite different according to the dynamic level at which they're played. The electro/acoustic situation thus requires a different approach to notated dynamics, which will be one reason why recordings of Turangalîla vary in this parameter to the extent that they do.

[Bryn]

Nail and head! The art of the recording engineer must allow for a broad range of listening conditions, not just the select few for whom what they're listening on can seem more crucial than what they're listening to. If we're not careful, that can produce the most useless kind of sterile one-upmanship in place of debate.

These two gargantuan Messiaen scores certainly present very different challenges in the hall and on disc, where the visual and spacial elements cannot be part of the equation. It's certainly easier to appreciate them in the hall. At home (when we're not on the road!) most of us have to experience these recordings in smallish rooms, using standard hi-fi equipment and possibly headphones. So before we start indulging in delicious hieratics, we have to be able to hear - as near as possible - what Messiaen wrote. That's the bottom line.

Edit: it's perhaps a pity that Turangalila doesn't seem to be available to watch on DVD, which could well enhance the work for many people. As someone for whom, unfortunately, the work has "gone cold", part of my problem has been never being able to recapture my first experience of it, which was live at the Free Trade Hall, Hallé, Skrowaczewski, rather a long time ago!

Fortunately, Youtube is not short of full performances of the work with professionally directed video, e.g.:

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9r4eeMZBInY)

[Master Jacques]

Fortunately, Youtube is not short of full performances of the work with professionally directed video, e.g.:

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9r4eeMZBInY)

Thank you, Bryn - very thoughtful!

[RichardB]

Fortunately, Youtube is not short of full performances of the work with professionally directed video

I'm looking forward to watching that one, thanks Bryn. I've become a great admirer of Susanna Mälkki's conducting.

[Bryn]

I'm looking forward to watching that one, thanks Bryn. I've become a great admirer of Susanna Mälkki's conducting.

Likewise.

[makropulos]

That's a bit weird though, because if SR really thinks it should be quaver=84 why does he then still play it not much faster than half of the speed he thinks Messiaen wanted? Did Messiaen really make mistakes like that with his tempo indications? Member Makropulos, we need an expert opinion here.

Looking at Nichols' review makes me want to go back to the Chung recording, which I thought at the time would be fairly easy for other conductors and orchestras to improve on, although others seem to think that it's still the best one so far.

Richard, not sure if this has already been answered, but in case not, I can report re the metronome marks for Éclairs that they are not Messiaen's own: early hire scores (before the score was engraved) were facsimiles of Messiaen's autograph full score and the metronome marks are added in Loriod's hand. I asked her about this, and she said they were fixed during rehearsals for the NY premiere. Apparently it was OM's usual practice to finalise metronome marks when he was hearing the piece played –so there are none by him on the Éclairs score as if was first performed posthumously. Hope that makes some kind of sense. It also makes me wonder about the authority of them in this particular piece. Because, as you say, Messiaen didn't make mistakes with his tempo indications –even if he sometimes changed his mind (aren't there some differences in the two scores of Turangalîla? –I can't remember, and don't have the revised score to hand).